Defense is trying to suggest that the hose could've been hung up prior to the murders.
So, here's all that would've needed happen in the few minutes between the video and the murders for the defenses apparent story to be true:
- Alex, Maggie or Paul tracks down Bubba the dog who's known to be stubborn.
- Alex, Maggie or Paul removes chicken from Bubbas mouth.
- Alex, Maggie or Paul puts Bubba back in a kennel.
-Alex, Maggie or Paul rolls hose back up into its rack.
- Alex leaves the kennel and returns to the house.
- murderer(s) arrive on property without alarming Maggie or Paul
- murderer(s) find guns left on property without alarming Maggie or Paul.
Honestly thought in the beginning the prosecution was going to have to convince me that it was him without doubt
Now it is the defense needing to prove to me somehow that all this could have happened without AM being a part if it
They have to convince me why all these coincidences happened
-He was there but did not do it? Lied about being there
-There were random guns so happened to be left exactly where Paul and Maggie were after Maggies was talked into coming to the house
-AM changed clothes, clothes were completely dry like they had just come out of the dryer (words of investigator), but he was sweaty
-He immediately appears to be covering tracks calling the guy who PM sent the video too asking if he received it just after the murders
To me the prosecution has uncovered motive between finances, upcoming boat trial, potential rocky marriage, etc. They have placed him there when he said he was not, given a timeline that lays out dout, and uncovered lie after lie than Alex told in statements and questioning
To me, now it is up to the defense to throw some sort of curve ball to the prosecution to create doubt but right now the prosecution has me believing that there is basically no way he was not in someway involved